[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: [xsl] Re: XProc or not XProc?
Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: XProc or not XProc? From: "James Fuller" <james.fuller.2007@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 12:09:49 +0200 |
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 8:41 AM, Vladimir Nesterovsky <vladimir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm sorry if this post opens a new thread, as I'm answering to my original > post, which probably have no reference id assigned by a server. > > > To clarify my position, I shall ask another question: > > Why xslt is not a ground for XProc? > > In my opinion it is a natural sequence of events: > a demand of pipelining, error handling, and so on, is appearing; > to answer the the demand people design extensions to xslt (functions and > instructions); > these extensions are discussed and standardized; > XProc is appearing as something based on xslt. I think that you should take a look at the requirements and use cases doc for XProc http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc-requirements/ whereas I am with you that one of the reasons why something like XProc is emerging is because of the clunky approaches using XSLT, Ant, Cocoon, and a whole host of psuedo pipelining approaches. to be specific, XProc is a response to a defined set of requirements, but it is not 'based on xslt'. hth, Jim Fuller
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] Re: XProc or not XProc?, Vladimir Nesterovsky | Thread | [xsl] Re: OOXML, John Cavalieri |
[xsl] Re: XProc or not XProc?, Vladimir Nesterovsky | Date | RE: [xsl] XProc or not XProc?, Michael Kay |
Month |
Keywords